Language Questions on the Subjunctive
Today some questions on the subjunctive came up. In case you’re interested, I’m uploading some notes I wrote for my Advanced students on a few Subjunctive matters. I’ll make a few copies and bring them to class.
Clarifying: My selection criterion of what to explain about Language (or Grammar) is practical, functional -- I select what I need to explain in connection to your common mistakes when communicating, verbally or in written texts. Communicative language teaching is about that, really, not about presenting comprehensive explanation by grammar topics. Consequently, all my explanations are related to mistakes learners usually make.
I’m sending you the link below, a brief and traditional explanation on the topic, which I hope will satisfyManuel. For me, this explanation is far from complete – it’s not informative about use. It’s just aboutusage (think of the points I was raising today and consider that Usage has not the power it has in Spain/Spanish because in English-speaking countries the power lies in Descriptivism, not in Prescriptivism, and that is why they do not have Royal Academies of the Dead Word and the like. They just have fantastic dictionaries where you find definitions that match what people mean, and the spelling of words people use, unlike what happens when you use our DRAE). Still, it’sthe explanation we’ve always had, the authentic traditional explanation you will find in zillions of textbooks:
In any case, as I explained today, there is no universal answer to how we use language. Our choice in words and structuresshould take into account the situation, the people involved, one’s communicative intentions and aims…Sometimes being “proper” sounds so bombastic that it makes people laugh. (I mean, it’s not only “the other way round” – i.e. being slangy in formal situations makes people laugh.) An educated person knows how to adapt his or her language to context, as we all know at least intuitively. And this should be anybody’s aim, really. (Still, for instance, when I have to be more formal, I am far from doing what traditionally formal people do with language: wording things in such pompous and rhetoric ways that what you are writing about seems to be the least important question. Just read my Doctorate papers in English and compare my language to more bombastic people. I keep things understandable in spite of being formal. Because what I am most concerned with is the analysis of ideas, not “prestigious” academics believing that I belong to their group because I use the kind of language they use -- as you read in the Lexical Creativity papers, says a lot about ourselves, in many various ways. Oh my! But this is no topic for our course, is it?)
Allow me to expand on one of the questions, for the examples collected here do not illustrate what happens with the third person singular, which was Silvia’s question:
2. In “that” clauses expressing a wish, request, recommendation or report of a command.
Examples:
The president requested that the emissary be treated fairly.
The attorney general demanded that the Congress cometo a decision immediately.
The committee recommended that the rules be changed.
The subjunctive has no “-s” form. It’s a bare infinitive– i.e. same form for everybody!
Here is the example I mentioned in class, which you can add to the previous list:
We suggested she leave early
For sceptics, here is an example I googled:
Daryn Kagen did she quit or did CNN suggest she leave?
delegates are suggesting the governmentbuild simple, small low-rent apartments for young white collar workers
The fact is that many native speakers would agree with “no –s there sounds really strange” (a feeling some people had in class today). Many native speakers could simply say: “I suggest she leaves early” or “delegates are suggesting the government builds…”. So what? From a descriptivist point of view (i.e. contrary to the prescriptivist point of view), there is no dramatic issue in people addingan “-s” there. As Saussure explained, la masse parlante rules, and as language evolves, if most people add the “-s” that’ll be the way that is said in that language – it will be correct. I know that for non Linguists this idea is hard to understand, and usually equated with: descriptivists don’t care if we make mistakes. My advice would be: study a language, not in Communicative courses like this one, as Linguists. You’ll realize a simple fact: many of the words, structures, expressions we use today come from “mistakes” in the past, and today they’re simply standard. That’s a fact in the History of any language.